Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Been trying to figure out a way of costing up models based on stats, do you think it's as simple as 1=1 or more complex than that?
I.e. do you think WS4 is 4 points, what about T4 is this 4 points?
I'm experimenting with making some home grown rules and trying to figure out how to cost up correctly.
What do you think?

Boniface wrote:
Been trying to figure out a way of costing up models based on stats, do you think it's as simple as 1=1 or more complex than that?
I.e. do you think WS4 is 4 points, what about T4 is this 4 points?
I'm experimenting with making some home grown rules and trying to figure out how to cost up correctly.
What do you think?

You can't apply flat points costs to things in a vacuum... You need to look at the capabilities of the finished product and how all of it's abilities synergise and allow it to perform both it's role, and any secondary uses it can be put to.

I don't think GW uses a system like that.
Some guidelines though: If you take a chaos marine as base Mark of Nurgle tells us that T 4->5 is worth 3 points, and through Mark of Slaanesh we know that I 4->5 is worth 2 points.
On a cultist (Guard like character), T3->4 is worth 2 points, and 3->4 is worth 1 point.

All stats varies in usefulness depending on how high they start, for example, T5->6 is worth more than 3->4 since 5->6 grants immunity to instant death, same goes for I, where 3->4 and 4->5 is probably more valuable than 8->9 since, at 4 you strike at the same time as a marine, and at 5 you strike before a marine, and most players play some form of marines.

But it does not end there, the value of anything (a weapon, a stat, a special rule) depends very much on what is "around" it, so weapons and special rules need to be considered together, not as separate entities.

It's actually impossible to come up with a straight 1:1 here, simply because stats matter more depending on other stats. BS6 matters a lot if I have a railgun, significantly less if I have a bolt pistol.

This is the kind of thinking that led to the 3e VDR and related insanity (for reference you could have a 10-10-10 Flyer with the Tiger Shark D-strength Railgun for...135pts)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Usually if you're trying to cost homebrew find something in the game that works similarly and come up with pros/cons lists.

It's as useful as using a dartboard to decide on points costs

1 to 1 never works well otherwise T1 W1 Bs10 units with mega guns would be everywhere.

I personally prefer basing it off chance throughout whatever rule set is being used (statistical averages)

I meant more like a starting point to adjust from.
So say I'm going to use a range of 10 and 5 is the middle point we'll work around. Would I be better off starting off with add a point is +2 take one off is -1 point?

Ah personally i prefer slightly bigger numbers just to help separate differences

10s are a nice way to go i think

Otherwise you can base them off 10s out of 100s then divde them down if the numbers start seeming ridiculous.

 Desubot wrote:
1 to 1 never works well otherwise T1 W1 Bs10 units with mega guns would be everywhere.

I personally prefer basing it off chance throughout whatever rule set is being used (statistical averages)

I'd much rather have a T10 W10 BS1 unit

Take the closest existing unit that's not blatently overpowered and work from there. Preferably with as few special rules as possible (or at the least, the same special rules you want).

Guardsmen/Firewarrior/Scout/Marine etc.

Figure out what you want to do from there by looking at the various differences. They won't always be the same,, but should give you a rough guide.

One thing to remember to do would be to sit back and say "If I had to take my regular list, would I want to play against someone else who is using whatever I've just cooked up?"

1:1 stats is where we got WS4 I4 A2 Vanguard Veterans paying the same exorbitant price as WS6 I5 A4 Chapter Masters for power weapons.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
1:1 stats is where we got WS4 I4 A2 Vanguard Veterans paying the same exorbitant price as WS6 I5 A4 Chapter Masters for power weapons.

Whilst I do appreciate what you're saying (a chapter master gets more from the weapon) there is technically no difference in the weapon so I can see a potential issue costing it differently in different platforms. That's more the general rules being problematic.

Boniface wrote:
Been trying to figure out a way of costing up models based on stats, do you think it's as simple as 1=1 or more complex than that?
I.e. do you think WS4 is 4 points, what about T4 is this 4 points?
I'm experimenting with making some home grown rules and trying to figure out how to cost up correctly.
What do you think?

I don't think GW uses such a system, and I don't think a 1 to 1 system would work. I think you'd need a complex formula of some kind. Here's how I'd rank stats:

Most valuable
- Toughness
- BS (assuming the unit has decent guns available)
- Wounds (I'd rate these higher if the model has T5+ or EW, and much lower if it has T3)

Mid value
- Strength
- Attacks (assuming the unit has either high strength or access to useful melee weapons)
- Ld (could instead be high- or low-value, depending on whether or not the unit has a rule like Fearless)

Low Value
- WS
- Initiative (If the unit lacks assault grenades, I'd probably count their initiative value as being half its actual value)

I'd also bear in mind that:

1) Some stats interact - e.g. toughness is more valuable on models with multiple wounds (or vice versa)

2) A model's other abilities may also interact with these scores - e.g. FNP is a lot more useful on a high-toughness model than on a low-toughness one.

3) Some stats get progressively better, others don't. e.g. each point of strength or toughness you add will likely make a big difference to that model's offence or survivability. In contrast, the difference between I7 and I10 is often negligible. Likewise, the difference between WS9 and WS10 is minute (though, there is an important difference between WS8 and WS9 and between WS6 and WS7).

4) Many of these stats will depend on the model's role and what wargear he has available. A model might have BS7, but if his only weapon is a bolter, it probably won't accomplish much.


Anyway, that's how I view stats. But, I really have no idea how I'd go about making a formula to cost them. Seems like an interesting challenge though.